Flesh

by Layla Charron

The term flesh has a wide range of institutional and individual definitions. Most generically, flesh is described by the Oxford English Dictionary as “the soft substance consisting of muscle and fat that is found between the skin and bones of an animal or a human”. Flesh is an integral part of the body, housing tissue that pumps blood, regulates temperature, provides energy, and supports movement. It is crucial to all animals as living, breathing creatures. It is also what gets eaten off of bones when carcasses are utilized for nourishment. From humans to animals to fruit, flesh is oftentimes seen as something to take and consume, to devour. Flesh also has more blatantly violent connotations. Fleshing, the present participle verb of flesh, can be used to describe the removal of flesh from the skin. Fleshing can also be used to describe initiating bloodshed by inciting an attacker, most commonly troops or hounds. Additionally, the flesh can be in reference to bodily desires and sexuality, usually in contrast to the mind and soul, as if it is an entirely separate entity. Flesh is represented in religious contexts as well, being seen in both the Hebrew and Christian Bibles. These texts show the dualities of flesh, with it being written as both sacred and sinful. In the Bible, flesh is described as one of the three enemies of God, in company with the World and the Devil. These are considered the main three sources of temptation within Christianity, with flesh being used to describe gluttony and sexual immorality. Flesh is a significant word that spans several fields of study, such as Native American Indigenous Studies, Black Studies, and Gender Studies. This term overlaps in each field to create a varied definitionof what flesh means and represents, both historically and in contemporary academia. When I had initially begun to consider my keyword essay, flesh stuck out to me as a word that felt incredibly relevant to reproduction, which is what attracted me to the word in the first place. In fleshing out this keyword essay, I found it challenging for my keyword to not be written about through the lens of reproduction and bodily autonomy, given my interest in the subject and how heavily connected the ideas are. It is for this reason that my essay has an emphasis on gender, reproduction, and reproductive justice. I would even consider reproduction to act as sort of a “sub-keyword” of flesh within my keyword essay.

Flesh in gender studies and feminism has an extensive history, with women of color being at the forefront of theorization. Originally published in 1981, “This Bridge Called My Back”, is “the complex confluence of identities-race, class, gender, and sexuality-systemic to women of color oppression and liberation", as written by Cherríe Moraga, co-editor, along with Gloria E. Anzaldúa, of the book. This was created at a time in which white feminism was especially prevalent and attempted to silence the work that women of color were doing in the field of gender studies. “The Bridge Called My Back” is an anthology that features writings on intersectional feminism and identity by women of color, with flesh being prominent throughout the book. The third chapter of the piece, entitled “Entering the Lives of Others: Theory in the Flesh”, focuses on “pursuing a society that uses flesh and blood experiences to concretize a vision that can begin to heal…” (Moraga and Anzaldúa). The editors describe a theory in flesh as “one where the physical realities of our lives - our skin color, the land or concrete we grew up on, our sexual longings - all fuse to create a politic born out of necessity” (Moraga and Anzaldúa). By theorizing flesh in this way, there is an emphasis on the all-encompassing andconsuming nature of struggle, and how out of these tangible realities – this “flesh and blood” –can grow change and healing. Max Wolf Valerio’s piece in this section entitled “It’s In My Blood, My Face – My Mother’s Voice, The Way I Sweat” discusses motherhood, virginity, sexuality, and identity. Valerio, a transgender Blackfoot/Sephardic man, begins the piece by reflecting on the Okan or “Sundance”, a ceremony that includes the dancing of a “holy woman”, a woman who has only been sexually intimate with her husband and is considered a “virgin of sorts”. Valerio shares his discomfort and distance from his Blackfoot identity as traditions like this are “conservative” and “patriarchal”, as they value a woman’s purity, body, and sexuality above all else. The remainder of the piece is Valerio’s reflection on his identity as an Indigenous and Chicano person who, at the time, identified as a lesbian. Valerio is caught between thinking through what this identity means to him, or entirely disregarding it. However, he knows that he cannot and does not want to forget about his identity, stating, “It’s in my blood, my face, my mother’s voice, it’s in my voice, my speech rhythms, my dreams and memories. It's the shape of my legs and though I am light skinned it is my features - my eyes and face shape…it must even be the way I sweat! Why it's damn near everything!” (Valerio). The emphasis on physicality, tradition, and gender throughout this piece reflects the concept of flesh as described in the chapter’s opening message, “physical realities of our lives…all fuse to create a politic born out of necessity” (Moraga and Anzaldúa). This theory of flesh and its relation to purity and sexuality remain especially significant in regard to reproduction.

Reproductive Justice (RJ) was first coined and formulated into a framework by a group of black women called the Women of African Descent for Reproductive Justice in 1994 at a conference in Chicago. In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda describes RJas, “the human right to control our sexuality, our gender, our work, and our reproduction”. They expand that this is only possible when “all women and girls have the complete economic, social, and political power and resources to make healthy decisions about our bodies, our families, and our communities in all areas of our lives”. At the heart of reproductive justice is the idea of autonomy in every aspect of a person’s life, and that those in need are given resources to do so. The group amplifies that the key beliefs in the fight for reproductive justice are that “all women have the right to have children, the right to not have children, and the right to nurture the children we have in a safe and healthy environment”. RJ is about freedom to make decisions, specifically spearheaded by women of color who are often granted the least decision-making power, even concerning their own bodies. This is separate, however, from reproductive rights. Whereas reproductive rights mostly focus on legal structures, reproductive justice goes beyond this framework and instead positions itself as more expansive and intersectional, “positioning women of color and their communities at the center – supporting their leadership and their power”(National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice). The NLIRJ frames this distinction as reproductive justice being “reproductive rights with a social justice lens”. Building on the idea of intersectionality, RJ also employs recognition that reproduction has a longer history of colonization and white supremacy, and is not limited to birth control and rights.

Reproductive justice as a framework aligns with common Indigenous values of relationality, community care, and self-determination. Long before colonization, birth control in various forms has been a part of Indigenous cultures and practices. According to Healthline, herbal contraceptives were extremely common, with examples including black cohosh, blue cohosh, and stoneseed, to name a few. Abortion was also a frequent and normalized practice by Nativepeoples. Despite the long history of bodily autonomy and self-determination within Indigenous communities, in recent decades there has been a major shift towards endangering these protections. In 1976, the Hyde Amendment was established, prohibiting federal funding for abortion services. This had detrimental effects on Native communities because it restricted access to reproductive health care provided by the Indian Health Service, which is “often the sole provider of reproductive health services for Native populations” (Arnold). This denial of abortion care and access in all clinics and hospitals run by the IHS required Native women to travel excessive distances and at great financial costs to receive abortions or other reproductive support.

There is a long and deeply disturbing history of oppressing women of color through reproduction and sexuality. In recent years, there has been some public outcry in regard to the foundation of modern gynecology. James Marion Sims, a man considered to be the “Father of Gynecology”, was a 19th-century gynecologist who experimented on enslaved women in Alabama. Sims was awarded and praised throughout his lifetime and posthumously, especially in regard to his work on developing a surgical technique for the repair of vesicovaginal fistula, a severe complication of obstructed childbirth. His work, however, was entirely inhumane, as he conducted medical testing on enslaved black women “bound to the surgical table by chattel slavery, physical force and opium” (Washington). This unethical testing illustrates how the flesh of Black women’s bodies has historically been violated and disregarded in the reproduction sphere. Sterilization, a permanent method of birth control that involves the blocking or cutting of the fallopian tubes, is disproportionately used on women of color. Studies show that NativeAmerican women are twice as likely as White women to have undergone tubal sterilization, while Black women are of an even higher rate (Volscho).

Sterilization has been used as a means to further oppress women of color and their freedoms. The passing of the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970 resulted in the sterilization of at least 25% of Native American women of childbearing age. Many of these procedures were done without proper understanding from the recipient or were permitted under pressure from others. Marie Sanchez, chief tribal judge on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation, refers to this as the “modern form” of genocide (Time). Forced sterilization was not a new development in the 70s, however, with the “Mississippi Appendectomy” being a well-known procedure that impacted many lives decades prior. Coined by Fannie Lou Hamer, a survivor of the inhumane procedure, a Mississippi Appendectomy is the “practice of unwanted sterilization via complete hysterectomy by medical professionals on unknowing Black patients” (WashU Medicine). The sterilization was usually done while patients were in the hospital for other treatments, with the patients being completely unaware that something more was being done to them without their consent. Despite Fannie’s experience taking place decades ago, this practice is still in many ways ongoing. In 2020 a case came to light of forced sterilization procedures on immigrant women in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Detention Centers, echoing a long history of this method being used on Latinas (ACLU). Additionally, there are many recent examples of the forced sterilization of incarcerated women which, given the racist history of the prison system, disproportionately targets women of color (Public Health Post). There are systems in the U.S. and internationally that work to specifically and strategically attack BIPOC women’s rights to have or not have children. This is done to exert control over the individuals and claim their bodies and their flesh as the government’s property, reflecting histories of colonization and oppression.

In the both groundbreaking and dense work “Mama’s Baby Papa’s Maybe: An American Grammar Book”, Hortense Spillers explores how American grammar shapes the experiences of Black women. Spillers argues that this system marks the flesh of Black women with multiple meanings, therefore contesting their gendering. She writes, “This profitable ‘atomizing’ of the captive body provides another angle on the divided flesh: we lose any hint or suggestion of a dimension of ethics, of relatedness between human personality and its anatomical features, between one human personality and another, between human personality and cultural institutions. To that extent, the procedures adopted for the captive flesh demarcate a total objectification, as the entire captive community becomes a living laboratory” (Spillers). Spillers uses the notion of flesh to explain how all enslaved people were viewed by colonizers as one entity, a sort of object for experimentation on the body.

In “An Indian's Looking-Glass for the White Man”, writer William Apess uses flesh in a way still related to colonization, but with a different approach. Apess creates the imagery of sin written across the flesh of colonizers. He calls for readers to imagine a scene in which all nationsare seated together, with the skins of those nations having their crimes written upon them. He queries, “Which skin do you think would have the greatest? I will ask one question more: Can you charge the Indians with robbing a nation almost of their whole continent, and murdering their women and children, and then depriving the remainder of their lawful rights that nature and God require them to have—and, to cap the climax, robbing another nation to till their grounds and welter out their days under the lash, with hunger and fatigue, under the scorching rays of a burning sun?” (Apess). Apess uses the powerful visual of flesh as a tool to list the harms inflictedonto colonized peoples by the oppressors, and to put into perspective the vastness of their crimes and harms. This visual ties back into the aforementioned connections between religion and flesh, with Apess using flesh to list off sin, as well as arguing that Jesus’ teachings did not include racial discrimination.

Flesh is a term that carries a deep importance within many communities and areas of study. Flesh has an interesting sense of duality. It can represent autonomy and bodily freedom, while also being representative of restrictions and objectification. Flesh showcases the sins of colonizers on full display, while also being used to theorize ways in which to heal from histories of oppression. The beauty of a word like flesh is its ability to be dynamic. Its histories and reiterations allow it to carry varying types of significance for different people. The word itself, similar to its core dictionary definition, is somewhat squishy and malleable, taking shape based on the people who it exists within.

Works Cited

Apess, William. “An Indian's Looking-Glass for the White Man.” Edited by Barry O'Connell. A Son of the Forest and Other Writings, University of Massachusetts Press, 1997.

Arnold, Shaye B. “Reproductive Rights Denied: The Hyde Amendment and Access to Abortion for Native American Women Using Indian Health Service Facilities.” PubMed Central, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4167108/#:~:text=Because%20the%20IHS%2 0is%20often,that%20includes%20access%20to%20abortion. Accessed 28 February 2025.

In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda. “Reproductive Justice.” National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda,

https://blackrj.org/our-causes/reproductive-justice/. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Lethabo King, Tiffany. “Flesh.” Keywords for Gender and Sexuality Studies, New York University Press, 2021, p. 4. De Gruyter.

Manian, Maya. “Immigration Detention and Coerced Sterilization: History Tragically Repeats Itself.” ACLU, 29 September 2020, https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-rights/immigration-detention-and-coerced-sterilization-history-tragically-repeats-itself. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Michelson, Naomi. “Brutality Behind Bars: Forced Sterilization in Prisons.” Public Health Post,https://publichealthpost.org/health-equity/brutality-behind-bars-forced-sterilization-in-prisons/. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Moraga, Cherríe, and Gloria Anzaldúa, editors. This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color. Kitchen Table, Women of Color Press, 1983. Accessed 28 February 2025.

The National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice. “What is the difference between reproductive health, rights, and justice?” The National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice, https://www.latinainstitute.org/resource/what-is-the-difference-between-reproductive-health-rights-and-justice/. Accessed 28 February 2025.

NHS. “What is female sterilisation?” NHS, https://www.nhs.uk/contraception/methods-of-contraception/female-sterilisation/what-is-it/#:~:text=Female%20sterilisation%20is%20a%20permanent,99%25%20effective%20at%20preventing%20pregnancy. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Olopaade, Jennie. “The History of Birth Control: Early Methods, Legal Issues, & More.” Healthline, 28 June 2021, https://www.healthline.com/health/birth-control/history-of-birth-control#early-history. Accessed 28 February 2025.

“Flesh, N., Sense I.1.a.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford UP, December 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/9435915922.

Rodriguez, Nelesi. “Hortense Spillers' “Mama's Baby, Papa's Maybe: An American Grammar Book” — Nelesi Rodriguez: Bits of Self.” Nelesi Rodriguez: Bits of Self, 1 March 2019, http://bitsofself.com/rtp-mixtape/2019/3/1/spillers-hortense-mamas-baby-papas-maybe-an-american-grammar-book-diacritics-vol-17-no-2-summer-1987-pp-6481. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Spillers, Hortense J. Mama's Baby, Papa's Maybe: An American Grammar Book. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987. Mama's Baby, Papa's Maybe: An American Grammar Book, https://www.jstor.org/stable/464747. Accessed 28 February 2025.Theobald, Brianna. “The Native American Women Who Fought Mass Sterilization.” Time, 27 November 2019, https://time.com/5737080/native-american-sterilization-history/. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Volscho, Thomas W. “Sterilization Racism and Pan-Ethnic Disparities of the Past Decade: The Continued Encroachment on Reproductive Rights.” The Continuing Struggle against Genocide: Indigenous Women's Reproductive Rights, vol. 20, no. 1, 2005, pp. 71-95. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40891307?seq=1. Accessed 28 February 2025.

Washington, Harriet A. “A medical hell recounted by its victims.” Nature, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00340-5. Accessed 28 February 2025. WashU Medicine. “Black History Month, Week 2: Fannie Lou Hamer.” WashU Medicine, https://obgyn.wustl.edu/black-history-month-week-2-fannie-lou-hamer/#:~:text=The%20practice%20of%20unwanted%20sterilization,as%20the%20%E2%80%9CMississippi%2 0Appendectomy%E2%80%9D. Accessed 28 February 2025.